On Thursday, 27 January 2005 at 11:00, John Franklin wrote: > The patch is UNIXy in its own way. Mutt is good at managing e-mail. > libESMTP is good at delivering e-mail to a server. They're > both simple tools that do their thing well. Rather than fork off a > process, use a library call. The library has function parameters as > its API. The process has command line options. What's the difference? I have to admit I'm a little irritated by libesmtp's decision to implement its own SASL library instead of just using Cyrus. CRAM-MD5 is better than nothing, but I'd much prefer to use GSSAPI or DIGEST-MD5. If it had a mode that let it take over a socket after you'd set it up (like openssl does), it'd be a much nicer fit.
Attachment:
pgpHPOT75761N.pgp
Description: PGP signature